are you allowed to take the october test in the US and then if you dont do well, take the test in october overseas in Asia? I think I heard someone suggesting this but I'm not sure if this is allowed. Anyone?

What do you mean it ruins the integrity of the test if you take a DIFFERENT test 3 weeks later? Whats the difference between taking it 3 weeks later than 6 weeks later (december)?

you are retaking either way and both counts as one of your 3 attempts per 2 year rule...

Just out of curiosity, have you taken the test before? If so, you know there's a big difference between test day and practice test experiences. Having two tests within 3 weeks gives an unfair advantage to people who:

a.) can afford to travel abroad or are bilingualb.) test better after taking the real test

I would think it gives an advantage to someone who take 2 months to study rather than 3 weeks. 3 weeks aint gonna change your score. however, I do understand why they wouldn't let someone do this, for it gives an advantage for people because they can send apps earlier than december takers...

I would think it gives an advantage to someone who take 2 months to study rather than 3 weeks. 3 weeks aint gonna change your score. however, I do understand why they wouldn't let someone do this, for it gives an advantage for people because they can send apps earlier than december takers...

3|ink wrote:Just out of curiosity, have you taken the test before? If so, you know there's a big difference between test day and practice test experiences. Having two tests within 3 weeks gives an unfair advantage to people who:

a.) can afford to travel abroad or are bilingualb.) test better after taking the real test

b) is moot since people are allowed to take multiple times.

a) speaks to a potentially valid point about wealth affording an advantage to applicants who take the test for the first time in December and want to retake instead of taking in February or next year (and to a lesser extent first time takers in Oct who then don't have to wait until December). But even then, people who take in June (or Feb or the previous year) automatically have this advantage of multiple retakes.

If anything, this would allow you to take two tests within only one study period. Conversely, those who can't take it twice in october are forced to begin their studying from scratch.

Good for you, but that's not at all typical. And people who can't take it twice are not forced to start from scratch, that's ridiculous. They don't automatically lose all the skills they've gained and have to start all over just because it's for a different testing cycle. It's actually an advantage for the vast majority of people who can maintain their study efforts for the next few months since they are allowed more time to continue their studies.

Awfully confident for something based off a guess. I am inclined to agree with you that it's not allowed, I just wanted to know if you actually knew this for certain. Your reasoning for why it's such an advantage to people if they were allowed to do this is ridiculous though.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:b) is moot since people are allowed to take multiple times.

You missed the point, but it may have been because I didn't word it thoroughly. Yes, people are allowed to take it multiple times. However, taking another test only 3 weeks later gives the tester a significant advantage. Would you say that some who starts studying for the LSAT 3 weeks earlier than the rest has an advantage over other test takers? Assuming this person uses his time wisely, it's safe to say this is an advantage. Now imagine two students beginning to study for the LSAT at the same time. One student plans to take the test once. The other plans to take the same test as the first student, and then another 3 weeks later. Assuming the second student doesn't use those three weeks to dick around, it's safe to say the second student could potentially benefit from this.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:a) speaks to a potentially valid point about wealth affording an advantage to applicants who take the test for the first time in December and want to retake instead of taking in February or next year (and to a lesser extent first time takers in Oct who then don't have to wait until December). But even then, people who take in June (or Feb or the previous year) automatically have this advantage of multiple retakes.

Yes, but people who retake a test 3 months later typically have to begin studying from scratch. Alternatively, someone who takes a test 3 weeks later can use the first test to gauge his abilities and use the remaining 3 weeks to sharpen his skills.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:Good for you, but that's not at all typical.

Moving up even 1 point in 3 weeks would be an advantage.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:And people who can't take it twice are not forced to start from scratch, that's ridiculous. They don't automatically lose all the skills they've gained and have to start all over just because it's for a different testing cycle. It's actually an advantage for the vast majority of people who can maintain their study efforts for the next few months since they are allowed more time to continue their studies.

That's not the norm. People typically take breaks in-between.

Last edited by 3|ink on Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:b) is moot since people are allowed to take multiple times.

You missed the point, but it may have been because I didn't word it thoroughly. Yes, people are allowed to take it multiple times. However, taking another test only 3 weeks later gives the tester a significant advantage. Would you say that some who starts studying for the LSAT 3 weeks earlier than the rest has an advantage over other test takers? Assuming this person uses his time wisely, it's safe to say this is an advantage. Now imagine two students beginning to study for the LSAT at the same time. One student plans to take the test once. The other plans to take the same test as the first student, and then another 3 weeks later. Assuming the second student doesn't use those three weeks to dick around, it's safe to say the second student could potentially benefit from this.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:a) speaks to a potentially valid point about wealth affording an advantage to applicants who take the test for the first time in December and want to retake instead of taking in February or next year (and to a lesser extent first time takers in Oct who then don't have to wait until December). But even then, people who take in June (or Feb or the previous year) automatically have this advantage of multiple retakes.

Yes, but people who retake a test 3 months later typically have to begin studying from scratch. Alternatively, someone who takes a test 3 weeks later can use the first test to gauge his abilities and use the remaining 3 weeks to sharpen his skills.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:Good for you, but that's not at all typical.

Moving up even 1 point in 3 weeks would be an advantage.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:And people who can't take it twice are not forced to start from scratch, that's ridiculous. They don't automatically lose all the skills they've gained and have to start all over just because it's for a different testing cycle. It's actually an advantage for the vast majority of people who can maintain their study efforts for the next few months since they are allowed more time to continue their studies.

That's not the norm. People typically take breaks in-between.

It's actually quite common for students to improve from taking some time away from the LSAT and then returning to study it. And by no means is it starting from scratch, that's a ridiculous claim. And I guess we should ban students from studying straight from one LSAT to the next?

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:It's actually quite common for students to improve from taking some time away from the LSAT and then returning to study it. And by no means is it starting from scratch, that's a ridiculous claim. And I guess we should ban students from studying straight from one LSAT to the next?

I'm sorry if you can't grasp it, but it is far from ridicuolous. Starting from scratch doesn't mean you forget everything you've learned. It means starting over the process of preparing yourself for that big day. You spend months taking pre tests in preparation. To have to do that a second time is to start from scratch.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:It's actually quite common for students to improve from taking some time away from the LSAT and then returning to study it. And by no means is it starting from scratch, that's a ridiculous claim. And I guess we should ban students from studying straight from one LSAT to the next?

I'm sorry if you can't grasp it, but it is far from ridicuolous. Starting from scratch doesn't mean you forget everything you've learned. It means starting over the process of preparing yourself for that big day. You spend months taking pre tests in preparation. To have to do that a second time is to start from scratch.

Sorry, but your argument is a pile of fail. People's Pt scores do not just res[e]t to the diagnostic score. And like you agree, people don't forget everything you've learned. Thus, they don't start from scratch. They have a different starting point, obtained knowledge and skills.

i highly doubt the reason mentioned (gives unfair advantage to people that study well for 3 weeks after their first test) is why they dont let you take it again overseas. I emailed them so we'll see why...